Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
B/W Photodude

Does a Lack of Men Lead to Liberalism

Recommended Posts

B/W Photodude

This is a two part article:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/churchformen/2013/05/does-a-lack-of-men-lead-to-liberalism-part-1/

... , the mainline denominations began ordaining women – first as elders and deacons, but eventually as pastors, and even bishops. Initially it was just a few.

But as more women stepped forward, more men withdrew.

Here’s a frustrating truth about men: when women step up to lead, men step back.

Most men don’t have a problem with individual women in leadership positions. The shipwreck occurs when women and their values come to dominate a group. If a group or congregation has more than 50% female leaders, men quietly slip out the back door. 

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/churchformen/2013/05/does-a-lack-of-men-lead-to-liberalism-part-2/

But there’s a second more subtle reason female-led churches will always move toward liberalism. It has to do with a fundamental difference in the way the sexes see the world. Men tend to put rules first; women tend to put relationships first.

Boys will sacrifice relationships on the altar of rules.

Meanwhile, women spend their lives obsessed with relationships.

When a male-governed congregation grapples with a moral dilemma, its leaders will consult the rulebook first. “What does the Bible say about this?” they ask. Once the rule is established, the debate is closed. And if enforcing a rule hurts someone’s feelings? “We’re sorry,” the men say. “That’s the rule.” In a man-governed organization relationships are important, but rules trump.

But when a church is led mostly by women (or feminized men), its leaders will see a moral dilemma through the lens of relationships. They will ignore or re-interpret the rulebook so that no one needs to lose.

This article covers what happens when the men leave the church and the women take over. I can now hear someone somewhere start in on how Jesus was so people focused. However, he was very rule focused also. (Not a jot or tittle, ...) He also stated (approx), "if you chose family over me, you are not fit for the kingdom." The "gay issue" was not directly discussed, but the groundwork was laid. You hear so much about how people are hurting and you need to bend the rules to accommodate them. In the judgement, no rules will be bent to accommodate "the hurting."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

The Wanderer

looks like there will be some "firecrackers" lighting up the forum here soon. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
2 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

This article covers what happens when the men leave the church and the women take over. I can now hear someone somewhere start in on how Jesus was so people focused. However, he was very rule focused also. (Not a jot or tittle, ...) He also stated (approx), "if you chose family over me, you are not fit for the kingdom." The "gay issue" was not directly discussed, but the groundwork was laid. You hear so much about how people are hurting and you need to bend the rules to accommodate them. In the judgement, no rules will be bent to accommodate "the hurting."

from the article: Part 2

Quote

Yes, Jesus opposed a crushing legalism that drove a wedge between God and His people. But he did not oppose the law. He clearly said that he had not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. He refused to abandon even “the smallest letter of the least stroke of the pen” of the law until everything is accomplished (Matt 5:18). Jesus never ignored or bent the rules simply because someone felt offended or excluded – no matter how marginalized or oppressed they were.

This has got to be the best adhominem falsehood I have seen on the internet so far this year. Just incredible what people latch onto these days as "truth."

Ill be back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
22 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

The "gay issue" was not directly discussed, but the groundwork was laid. You hear so much about how people are hurting and you need to bend the rules to accommodate them. In the judgement, no rules will be bent to accommodate "the hurting."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude

The video didn't start out well. It stated that if you are not a homophobe you could watch. Unfortunately, if you do not approve of the gay lifestyle, you are deemed a homophobe! But I watched most of it anyway.

The one thing that struck me was all the twisting of Scripture and the omission of very important Scriptural texts. So, you need to be accurate in presenting Scripture or you are a liar.

While many will disagree that gay people should be baptized into membership and given leadership positions, I have seen none who have barricaded the doors and said gay people were not allowed into a church. Of course, we won't mention the churches who have gone to court and gotten restraining orders to prevent long time members who opposed the gay agenda from entering an SDA church. Yep, you read me right.

You will have to do better! (not to mentions we have thread drift here!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
3 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

You will have to do better! (not to mentions we have thread drift here!)

What do I have to do "better" at and why? Can you be more specific?

734881_500113370040853_930874928_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
17 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

The one thing that struck me was all the twisting of Scripture and the omission of very important Scriptural texts. So, you need to be accurate in presenting Scripture or you are a liar.

The Bible clearly shows where both Jesus and Satan left out "certain scriptures" so you will have to do much better than that!

1/ You have stated how that the video I enclosed above "didn't start well," and the reason you gave was because the video stated "if you are a homophobe don't watch this video." This was one part of your response that surprised me to be sure. The young man in the video is not interested in changing anyone's mind, his primary focus was on starting the conversation with those who are interested in reaching out to a segment of the population that the church usually marginalizes or worse. I remain disappointed that our churches seem to be so off limits to LGBTQ people by some of the very ones who are heterosexual, but see no problem with breaking the seventh commandment, and others. Additionally, some of these who pit themselves against "the sinners" are the same ones who become doctors nurses etc so that they can "work on the Sabbath."(not saying you do, I am wrestling with ideas here, not you). My question to the statement you have offered is simply: who on earth ARE we allowed to invite to church? Currently; I am scared to come to any of our churches for fear that someone I would like to invite may not in fact be welcome because of some certain sin, or perceived sin in their life.There are IMO some things the church COULD change their course on here, without "breaking" any of the myriad of invisible rules we invent on the fly to "keep the real sinners" out.What makes us any better than them?

2/ Granted, some of the scriptures used MIGHT be out of context; however, to use them as an entering wedge, to try to get people to see that there IS something in scripture "even for them" is what this young man is doing, and I am still scratching my head over this one as to why its such a crime to do? This is NOT, nor was it ever, a matter of marshalling up the forces and pitting ourselves against one another as 1) the side that agrees and 2) the side that disagrees with some lifestyle that we do not believe is right. Or 3) as promoting the idea that we can only "witness" by giving a complete crusade to everyone who is guilty of the pet sins we like to attack. Its like we want to preach about "the mark of the beast" to a person on their death bed so that they can "accept" it before they die. There was, in fact, no "ommission" of Scripture in the video. Again, this video is seeking a bigger slice of a bigger pie. You know, the one where we are willing to be like Jesus and start a civilized conversation to lead out into a safe environment for us to dialogue with LGBTQ and others similar. Jesus did the same thing with "sinners" "tax collectors" "adulterers, etc. He would often just mention what he felt was MOST important to the individual. Jesus was always very careful to show acceptance of the person; even with Judas, by calling him "friend." DID Jesus "leave out some scripture" there??

3/ Who is a "liar?" WHO on earth is so "reliable" and "accurate" with their use of scripture, that they would NOT in fact be a liar, by this definition as stated in your post. Is that really what this is about? How would we prove that a person is a "liar" because they didnt get some doctrine "right?"

4/ The Restraining Order Mantra...I swear, some people use this idea almost like an incantation. They think if they just say it, in connection with their cause, that we, the unknowing miserable masses, will cower in fear, and capitulate to some foul amorphous conspiracy theory dogma, that is lifted well-above sound Bible doctrine as the know all and catch all for "the sinners." The restraining Order thing is rarely done anywhere, and it is usually only in cases where a person or group is agitating a congregation to the extreme, and refusing to tone it down some so everyone could enjoy their non-sinning service.To intimate that the restraining order thing is now a standardized procedure for all who dare object to this or anything else, is not the truth.This whole post that I am responding to reminds me of the Dracula movie where the green mist comes slowly under the door untill it reaches a certain concentration; and then suddenly the Dark Lord is there, ready to sink his fangs into his next victim. As a church; WE CAN do better than that! Why should "sinners" be allowed to condemn "sinners here??"

5) (your post from Wednesday at 07:58 PM) 

Quote

"Yes, Jesus opposed a crushing legalism that drove a wedge between God and His people. But he did not oppose the law. He clearly said that he had not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. He refused to abandon even “the smallest letter of the least stroke of the pen” of the law until everything is accomplished (Matt 5:18). Jesus never ignored or bent the rules simply because someone felt offended or excluded – no matter how marginalized or oppressed they were."

Now; your post makes the claim that "scriptures were left out" in the video being question. This quote is a good illustration of "scripture being consistently and deliberately left out about HOW Jesus did witnessing to the marginalized and the "sinners" that the church refused to work with. We run around like pious little holy rollers yattering away about how Jesus wants us to come to Him "just as we are;" and yet when an LGBTQ comes to the church door, we holler away like a witch on a broom stick about how they need to be "just the way we are" first, before they can be welcome at "our" church, which really isnt "our" church; because its God's Church. We have fully embraced the doctrine of "our sins are better than your sins." Now WHERE have we seen that before?

It is NOT "liberalism" to try to reach any and all classes of people, including LGBTQ:

Quote

How then may they call on One into whom they have not believed? And how may they believe One of whom they have not heard? (Rom 10:14)

Quote

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Rom_10:17. {FLB 123.1}

Quote

 

The truths of the Word of God meet man's great practical necessity--the conversion of the soul through faith. These grand principles are not to be thought too pure and holy to be brought into the daily life. They are truths which reach to heaven and compass eternity, yet their vital influence is to be woven into human experience. They are to permeate all the great things and all the little things of life.  {FLB 123.2}

How far we come from representing the character of Christ! But we must lay hold of His merits by living faith, and claim Him as our Saviour. He died on Calvary to save us. Each should make it a personal work between God and his own soul, as though there were no one in the world but himself. When we exercise personal faith, our hearts will not be as cold as an iron wedge; we shall be able to realize what is meant by the psalmist when he says, "Blessed is he . . . whose sin is covered." Psa_32:1.  {FLB 123.3}

 

Quote

Rom 10:13 For everyone, "whoever may call on the name of YAHWEH will be saved." (Joel 2:32)
Rom 10:14 How then may they call on One into whom they have not believed? And how may they believe One of whom they have not heard? And how may they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how may they preach if they are not sent? Even as it has been written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news of peace, of those preaching good things." (Isa. 52:7)

We are all-too happy to sit in our adventist mega-perfect churches and listen to Adventist prosperity gospels and adventist perfection incantation; and the whole time we are doing that we fail to see that we are actually the religious termites turning a blind eye, and busily eating away at the very foundation of sound doctrine, and of 'the everlasting gospel". Once the main beam has been chewed completely through, the timber will break; our "conversion" will be complete; and we will join in the chorus of the Pharisees of long ago: "Baruch Haba ba Shem Adonai!" THAT is in fact what we are saying when we refuse to "accept" (theres that religious dirty word again) that Jesus, wants to be BOTH Lord and Savior to LGBTQ. It is NOT liberalism" that we need to worry about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
debbym

i would say no. 

we had a very strong paternal presence in our family and all of us seven kids tend to be liberal, yet spiritual and conservative in ways also.

Authoritarianism is connected to some conservatives, but there are conservatives who do not hold to this style.

liberal and conservative are very subjective terms in many ways... so many degrees and styles of each.

i know liberals who see conservatives as being less educated and religious nuts... and preoccupied with various forms of human authority.

Some conservatives see liberals as epicurean and indulgent and immoral and rationalizing whatever they want to do as being ok.

i know these are gross generalizations but it is what came to mind when i read this topic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phkrause
1 hour ago, debbym said:

i know these are gross generalizations but it is what came to mind when i read this topic.

I don't see this as being gross generalizations at all. For me personally there are no true conservatives or liberals! Each one of us has both, we are liberal in somethings and conservative in other things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude

To get the thread a bit back on track:

The Feminization of Men and the War Against Masculinity

In the last few years we have seen this campaign against masculinity engulf the world. It has become the latest trend in the culture wars and is also a subject that is clearly described in prophecy. God declares in Isaiah 3:1-3 that a time would come when He would take away from our midst “the mighty man, and the man of war … the captain of fifty, and the honourable man” (Isaiah 3:1-3).

This is exactly what we are seeing today, but there’s more. In verse 4 and verse 12 of this same chapter we are told that once our strong, masculine, male leadership is removed that “children” and “women” would take over and rule. (Isaiah 3:4, 12)

There’s more. In verse 9 of this same chapter we read about the real cause behind the vicious attack against strong, masculine, male leaders. It’s all so very clear:

“The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.” (Isaiah 3:9). ...

This is the real motive for the gender wars that we are seeing today. Sexual anarchists want to replace masculinity in men and boys with the feminism of Sodom. They will never sleep until this reengineering of society is complete. They want to turn men into women and women into men. ...

There is a connection between the feminization of a people and the spiritual decline of a nation. What will it take for a nation to fall? The consequences of rejecting the moral law of God has far greater consequences than we can ever realize.

http://adventmessenger.org/the-feminization-of-men-and-the-war-against-masculinity/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer

for now, in this post, I just want to point out that the magazine being referenced is NOT an Adventist publication, although the deceptive naming of same might fool some people. In other words, it is NOT The Adventist Messenger, as in the forum topic here re Stans Day Job. (My Day Job)

I will have to continue later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
18 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

I see your video, and raise you one!

https://youtu.be/aQcZjjDr47k

Well; this video does a lousy job of proving through scripture who should be counted as Christian, and who shouldnt be. But Ill come back to that in a future post.

You did a fair job in replying to the cartoon I posted; but it was a biased and very steriotyping mantra. It sounds like you are viewing this as a "competition" of sorts where the mandate is to somehow one-up the other guy.

I would encourage you to go back to the post I made at 11:31 am yesterday, and to refute the points I made from scripture. So far, your responses have not touched on any of those. A lot of heat, but no light. One of the poorest ways there are of studying scripture is to simply ignore a bunch of text that someone proposes an idea with, and then to simply bring up a bunch of other texts, with no attempt being made to address whats already on the table.

I will throw out an added challenge here, re the use of Isaiah, chapter 3 to "prove" the theory of modern "feminism" as being a pointed action spelled out in this or any other scripture. Are you seriously trying to tell us that Isa chapter 3 is about "the feminization" of men?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

for now, in this post, I just want to point out that the magazine being referenced is NOT an Adventist publication,

Then, what exactly is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
20 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

 

 

Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 23.01.22.jpg

I would call this stigmatizing, which really does nothing to disprove the fact that when we walk in the doors of the sanctuary, we are often asked to leave our brains somewhere else, or we are guilty of "not accepting" the ever-elusive "truth."   Additionally, I have said to someone I was discussing this with a while ago that I do not like to be called "straight" as I believe that some tend to use this term in a very pejorative sense, and it really serves no useful purpose. "Just call me David" is how I put it. This "cartoon" does a marvellous job at imposing STIGMA though! The guy in the video I posted above does have the right idea in that he is trying to find and practice ways of dialogue with others who are not "one of us" and trying to identify ways we can explore to witness for Christ despite the differences; be they physical or theological. Sometimes, unlike this cartoon says, its not even a matter of being "inclusive;" its just a matter of some people that WE The Church make to feel like a line has to be drawn somewhere because they know that if that line is crossed, we will chop them to bits with our theological guillotine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×